Keyword summary
0%1 analyzed article/video383 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Liam Conejo Ramos results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and In-Group Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 49.5% saturation with 799 hits. Analysis detected 4,933 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,614 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 10.5% and a BS Rank of 96% (1,776 of 37,536 keywords). This Liam Conejo Ramos is worse (more manipulative) than 95.30% of the peer group.
Liam Conejo Ramos
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Lieutenant Governor1%
0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
0%Texas Supreme Court1%
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
96%Liam Conejo Ramos (selected)11%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 1,614
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

95% percentile
025507510095.3% percentile
10.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.6K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

KeywordSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 49.5%49.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 44.2%44.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 23.9%23.9%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Keyword 18.4%18.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Keyword 20.1%20.1%Horn EffectSitewide 1.0%Keyword 13.3%13.3%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Keyword 12.1%12.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 16.3%16.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 2.4%2.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Keyword 11.2%11.2%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 49.5%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 44.2%, sitewide 19.2%Framing Effect: Keyword 27.4%, sitewide 26.9%In-Group Bias: Keyword 23.9%, sitewide 6.9%Anecdotal: Keyword 20.1%, sitewide 5.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 18.4%, sitewide 2.0%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 16.3%, sitewide 7.5%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 14.4%, sitewide 9.1%Horn Effect: Keyword 13.3%, sitewide 1.0%Bandwagon: Keyword 12.1%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 11.2%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 7.2%, sitewide 8.1%Optimism Bias: Keyword 7.4%, sitewide 6.0%Halo Effect: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 6.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 6.1%, sitewide 0.8%Straw Man: Keyword 4.8%, sitewide 0.9%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 4.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 4.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 1.9%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 3.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 2.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos